mrswdk wrote:And I already explained why that article is irrelevant, which I know you saw because you quoted my post in its entirety.
By all means, keep copy-pasting the same response in the hope it eventually becomes valid though!
All right, let's back up. You said:
mrswdk wrote:A 9-year old article about the Chinese police busting a small people trafficking operation = proof that 'the Chinese' use slave labor on their fishing fleets
Another slam dunk from the artist formerly known as a presidential candidate!
This totally mischaracterizes the article, as it wasn't just about "the Chinese police busting a small people trafficking operation." The article was describing the problem as endemic in Chinese society and used specific examples to illustrate said problem, which was so extensive that in just the initial crack down the Chinese government had to mobilize "35,000 officers checking 7,500 work places." That's not a small operation, considering particularly that it was just an initial deployment.
If you're really unaware of this problem, which is common knowledge, you can browse the links from the searches below:
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=china+sweatshopshttps://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=china+slaveryI mean come on... The first line of the wikipedia article titled "
Slavery in China" is "
Slavery in history affected, and continues to affect, millions in China."
This isn't something you can hide in countries whose government doesn't subject the population to an internet filter.